After climate talks, eyes on US for next round

Wednesday 19 December 2012

Doha, Dec 19 : Even as international climate talks ended this weekend with no new commitments on carbon emissions or climate aid from the United States, some were relieved America didn't make a weak deal even weaker.

Other countries are now watching to see if the Obama administration will back up post-election comments about climate change with renewed efforts to cut emissions at home, and pave the way for more ambitious targets as work proceeds to adopt a new global climate pact in 2015.

The two-week talks in Doha ended with an extension of the Kyoto Protocol, which was to expire this year, but which now will only cover 15 percent of global emissions since several developed countries, including Japan and Canada, have opted out. The U.S. never ratified the accord.

European Union Climate Commissioner Connie Hedegaard said that the U.S. negotiators were "careful not to block" the negotiations, adding that it's "still difficult to know whether they will actually invest political capital in committing to a new international deal."

In an emailed comment Hedegaard said she hopes Obama "will present not only an enhanced domestic climate policy but also an enhanced U.S. engagement and willingness to commit more in an international climate context."

Both rich and poor countries have long accused the U.S. of hampering the global effort to fight climate change, which scientists say is raising sea levels, threatening low-lying areas and island nations, and shifting weather patterns with impacts on droughts, floods and the frequency of devastating storms.

Alone among industrialized nations, the U.S. rejected the 1997 Kyoto Protocol, the only binding treaty to reduce emissions of carbon dioxide and other heat-trapping gases. The Bush administration said it would hurt the U.S. economy and that it was unfair because it didn't include emerging economies including China and India.

Hopes for stronger U.S. leadership in the U.N. talks under Obama were dashed when emissions-capping legislation stalled in Congress. But expectations rose anew this year after Hurricane Sandy pushed climate change back in the domestic political debate.

After his re-election, Obama talked about "the destructive power of a warming planet," and said he hoped to open a national conversation on the issue.

"I think what we saw from the U.S. in Doha was a mixed performance," said Alden Meyer, of the Union of Concerned Scientists.

He said the U.S. was a "major impediment" in negotiations to ramp up climate aid to help poor countries shift to clean energy and adapt to rising sea levels and other impacts of climate change.

On the other hand, the U.S. acknowledged that it has more work to do at home to meet its voluntary pledge of reducing emissions by 17 percent by 2020, compared to 2005 levels.

"Also, the lead U.S. negotiator, Todd Stern, expressed a newfound willingness to discuss how to equitably share responsibility amongst countries for making the substantial post-2020 emissions reductions needed to avoid the worst impacts of climate change," Meyer said. "These were both positive signals in Doha."

Some were relieved that U.S. negotiators didn't block a proposal by small island nations to discuss "loss and damage," which relates to damages from climate-related disasters.

Small island nations under threat from rising sea levels have been pushing for some mechanism to help them cope with such natural catastrophes, but the U.S. had pushed back over concerns it might be held liable for the cleanup bill since it is the world's second-biggest emitter behind China.

The Doha deal doesn't establish that kind of mechanism, but says that countries agree to talk about it.

"It is a significant change in (the U.S.) stance and big unexpected outcome for Doha," said Iain Keith, senior campaigner with activist group Avaaz.

He said overall there was "subtle yet significant shift" in the U.S. position in the talks.

"Many parties will be disappointed that the U.S. didn't come here and offer more on finance," he said. "But with the fiscal cliff discussion in Washington, their hands are tied," he added, referring to the looming combination of automatic tax increases and U.S. government spending cuts early next year.

The Doha deal included vague language on how rich countries would scale up climate aid to $100 billion annually by 2020 — a goal agreed to three years ago. With budgets under stress from financial turmoil, developed countries resisted calls by developing countries to make firm commitments.

"I think in general donor countries with some exceptions were not in a position to put hard numbers on table for all sorts of reasons among them fiscal challenges that we are facing in the U.S. and Europe is facing," said Stern, the U.S. climate envoy.

In news conferences in Doha, the U.S. delegates stressed what the administration has already done: increased fuel efficiency standards for cars and trucks, worked to boost energy efficiency in buildings and invested in green energy.

Wael Hmaidan, a Lebanese activist and director of the Climate Action Network, said he was disappointed that the U.S. didn't offer more in Doha, especially on financing for poor countries.

"We were hoping there would be some kind of movement after the election," he said. "We knew there wouldn't be any major change but we hoped there would be more flexibility and room and this was not demonstrated."

Some may have overestimated how quickly Obama's comments on climate change would translate into action, said Jake Schmidt, of the Natural Resource Defense Council.

"Things take time to settle in the U.S.," he said. "But I think there's a growing sense that climate change is real, extreme weather is happening in the U.S. It shows up in all the polls."

Schmidt said the administration could achieve further emissions cuts with new standards on existing coal-fired power plants.

Ends
SA/EN
Continue Reading | comments

Child joins street singer, steals the show

Washington, Dec 19 : Parents always have extreme confidence in their kids' talents. But here's the surprise: The kid is good and actually outshines the singer in the video.

It's a mystery how this adorable child bundled up in a stroller ended up joining a street performer in a duet. But the toddler can belt out a tune and, thanks to the video filmed by Kamil Litwinowicz, is now catching the attention of the Web.

Someone, probably dad, is seen at the beginning of the clip positioning the stroller next to the singer, who is performing on the main square in Krakow, Poland. He then walks off camera to enjoy the show, which quickly becomes a duet—and a Web hit.

Even though the tyke doesn't know the words to the operatic melody—they come out as basically "goo goo ga ga"—the kid is in tune and even overshadows the professional.

Ends
SA/EN
Continue Reading | comments

Loaded pistol found in package of frozen meat

New York, Dec 19 : UFOs aren't the only unexplained oddity happening in Roswell these days. A worker at an Albertsons grocery store in the New Mexico city found a loaded pistol inside a package of frozen meat.

So far, law enforcement officials tell local affiliate KRQE-TV that they have no idea where the gun came from. The Albertsons employee turned over the .38 Super, which was loaded with seven rounds of ammunition.

"I have personally never heard of this," Sgt. Jim Preston of the Roswell Police Department told the station.

Police say the frozen meat came from the Swift meatpacking plant in Greeley, Colo., and is dated June 8, 2011.

"We could speculate on a lot of things," Preston said. "It could have been someone just dropped it there, or it could have been something that someone put in there trying to hide it for 100 different reasons."

Both Colorado and New Mexico police say the gun has not been reported stolen. Unfortunately, the Albertsons employee wiped down the gun before handing it over, meaning there are no fingerprints or other evidence for police to collect in their investigation. Still, they are able to use the gun's serial number to track it to the last location from where it was sold.

"If we would have been notified while it was still in the box and no one would have touched it, there could have possibly been some forensic evidence that we could have actually looked into," Preston said.
Ends
SA/EN
Continue Reading | comments

Total should be wary of more M&A down under: Merrill

Washington, Dec 19 : French oil giant Total SA FP.FR -0.24% could have as much as US$10 billion available for M&A, but if it’s looking in Australia then it should think again.

That’s the view of Bank of America-Merrill Lynch analyst Matthew Yates, who says a rush of 10 deals Down Under since 2006 means Total is overweight in this country, and generating disappointing returns from its flagship liquefied natural gas projects.

Total owns 30% of the US$34 billion Ichthys LNG project in the Northern Territory, which started construction this year and aims to ship 8.4 million tons of LNG annually as well as produce 100,000 barrels a day of condensate, a form of light oil. It also has a 27.5% stake in the GLNG project that aims to convert coal seam gas to LNG in Queensland state, but has already run 16% over budget to US$18.5 billion.

“With the benefit of hindsight, we do not believe Total’s track record in acquisitions is particularly encouraging,” says Mr. Yates, who is based in London.

“We believe the company is over investing in Canadian oil sands and Russian/Australian LNG where returns are very low (and destroy value).”

Mr. Yates says the internal rate of return on Total’s Australian LNG projects is around 9%, compared with 33% for its Brazil investments and 35% in the Gulf of Mexico. The low quality of its investments places it at the bottom of the pack among European oil producers in terms of IRR on new projects, with Spain’s Repsol REP.MC -1.01% leading the way with an average IRR above 35%.

As a result, he thinks the most logical areas for potential M&A involving Total would be Mozambique, where rivals such as Anadarko Petroleum APC +2.65% have made a string of big natural-gas discoveries, and U.K.-based consultancy Wood Mackenzie estimates there could be as much as 80 trillion cubic feet of natural gas still to be found.

Kenya, Kurdistan, Brazil, Gulf of Mexico and liquids-rich U.S. unconventional plays should also be on Total’s radar, while the company could alternatively build on its current asset base in Norway and West Africa, he says.

“We estimate Total could have US$10 billion of balance sheet headroom for an upfront deal, but more likely is a farm into early stage projects requiring multi-year capex,” according to Mr. Yates.

Underpinning the rationale for M&A is the likelihood that future projects contributing around 350,000 barrels per day of production are at risk of extended delay or cancellation, he says.

Ends
SA/EN
Continue Reading | comments

Cisco's Meraki acquisition will post gains 'for years to come'

New York, Dec 19 : The corporate development department at Cisco (CSCO) has been on spending spree in 2012. The company has made ten acquisitions this year, three of which came in November alone. 

The company's most seminal acquisition to date came on November 18, 2012, when it acquired Meraki, Inc., a leader in cloud computing for middle-market businesses and enterprises. The acquisition will allow Cisco to make cloud-managed networks available to its middle-market businesses and enterprises. For a company that zealously defends its market share position, known for purging its competition, this move may be its boldest, and wisest, yet.

For the past few years, Cisco has vigorously defended its dominant market share of the networking business; often times, however, the ascent of cloud computing has revolutionized the industry. This series of acquisitions in 2012 has been part of the company's strategy to reassert its dominance with Meraki being its shrewdest move yet. It has, however, raised the following question: what does the acquisition of Meraki mean for the company going forward? There are 3 takeaways, all of which are positive for the company.

First, the acquisition is good for Cisco's customers on two fronts. First, while Cisco has made valiant strides with the Cisco Connect Cloud/Smart Wi-Fi platform, Meraki's cloud management expertise in amalgamation with Cisco's hardware will be a significant improvement, and will be a formidable product in the marketplace. Meraki's services are focused on the growing number of underserved middle-market companies who are expanding rapidly. Second, the acquisition will enable the company to bridge the nexus between its network hardware and cloud technology. According to Meraki, mobile devices accounted for the majority of devices accessing networks for the first time in 2012.

Second, by bridging the gap between network hardware and cloud computing, Cisco has not only created value for its clients, but has created a new growth driver for itself. The company, which grew at a modest 6% when other companies were experiencing negative growth recently, has been trying to determine ways to capitalize on the cloud computing revolution. Based on projections, Meraki believes that with Cisco's global reach, revenues, which are currently around $20 million, will see a significant spike in the not-so-distant-future.

Third, the acquisition will enable Cisco to meet its goal of maintaining a dominant share of the market. The biggest loser from this deal is Aruba (ARUN). Aruba's new cloud-based Wi-Fi solution, which was seen by the company as a key area for growth, will now become a parochial relic.

Cisco's most contentious rival, Juniper (JNPR), will be a close second in the race for biggest loser because of this acquisition. The networking company, which has always been a nemesis in the market share battle, will also face serious challenges because of Meraki's cloud controller architecture. This architecture, which is far better than the "controller-based" architectures, can easily transfer into cloud based SDN controller in the future-creating even more problems for Aruba and Juniper.

Hewlett Packard (HPQ) stands to lose as well. This acquisition is part of the larger SDN rivalry that has been going on between the two companies over the last year. Hewlett Packard, which has focused on cutting into Cisco's switching market share, finds themselves searching for a new solution to broaden its customer base quickly. The company, which acquired 3com to compete with Cisco in this business, will need to find other Wi-Fi vendors such as Meru or Ruckus to compete.

International Business Machine (IBM) also stands to lose, however, not as severely as the aforementioned companies. IBM, while it has strategic alliances with Cisco, is partnered with Brocade (BRCD) to provide Ethernet switching equipment that is no match to what Meraki and Cisco can provide. If Brocade is to compete in this area, they will need to be acquired quickly so they can not only expand their customer base but also have a team of engineers who can improve their network solutions.

Cisco's acquisition of Meraki was a smart move that will reap the company benefits for years as the cloud computing revolution determines the winners and losers for the next decade. While the stock price is still down from its year-to-date high in April, the company has positioned itself to continue to maintain, if not gain, market share in the networking business by taking advantage of cloud based technologies. The company is on a good path with the acquisitions it has made in 2012, with Meraki being its most seminal achievement to date.

The company set out in 2012 to make acquisitions a part of a larger plan to seek businesses with higher margins and lower costs, and to provide services and products that customers demand. Moreover, Cisco is focused on cloud-based companies that can address the broader networking shifts towards cloud. This vision has served the company well, and will do so going forward.


Ends
SA/EN
Continue Reading | comments

Ingersoll-Rand to spin off security business

New York, Dec 19 : Ingersoll-Rand Plc (IR) is expected to announce it will spin off its security division, two people familiar with the matter said, as the industrial conglomerate cedes to pressure from activist investor Nelson Peltz to unlock more shareholder value.

The company, which has a market value of more than $14.5 billion, also plans to buy back shares and increase dividends, one of the sources said.

The spin-off, buybacks and dividend hikes come as part of a strategic review undertaken by Ingersoll after Peltz's Trian Fund Management LP acquired a stake of about 7 percent and proposed a break-up of the company. Peltz joined the company's board in August after three months of agitating for changes at the manufacturer.

Ingersoll's security technology division -- which makes mechanical and electronic locks as well as steel doors -- had operating income of more than $330 million in 2011 on revenue of $1.63 billion.

The sources, who declined to be identified as the matter is not public, did not put a value on the division. Ingersoll and Peltz declined to comment.

Peltz has, among other proposals, suggested separating Ingersoll's main business units into three standalone publicly traded companies focused on air conditioning and heating, security, and the remainder of its industrials businesses.

Some analysts agreed, saying that Ingersoll's shares were undervalued because of its disparate businesses. Several other diversified conglomerates have also decided to break up, often under pressure from activist investors.

Activist investor Ralph Whitworth pressured industrial conglomerate ITT Corp (ITT.N) to split up its defense and water purifying businesses. Other companies announcing breakups or major divestitures include Tyco International Ltd (TYC.N), Kraft Foods Inc (KFT.O) and Fortune Brands (FBHS.N).

Ingersoll's biggest business is heating and cooling systems as a result of its 2008 purchase of Trane. It also makes industrial air compressors and golf carts.

Its competitors in heating and cooling include Johnson Controls' (JCI) York business, United Technologies Corp's (UTX) Carrier unit and Lennox International Inc (LII).

Ends
SA/EN
Continue Reading | comments

CNOOC pledge small step for China transparency, skeptics abound

Singapore, Dec 19 : CNOOC's promise of transparency, pledged to win approval from Canada for its $15.1 billion purchase of Nexen Inc, looks like a positive step on the face of it but is unlikely to represent a sea change in Chinese business practices.

To be sure, the details of commitment are not clear. The state-controlled energy firm has promised the Canadian government an annual compliance report on all its commitments that are part of its takeover of Nexen Inc, China's biggest ever takeover. These include listing shares on Toronto stock exchange, which comes with certain disclosure requirements.

But when capital is king, cash-rich Chinese state-owned enterprises have the balance of power in any acquisition talks, leaving doubts about the real potency of transparency pledges.

"On the transparency side, I believe there will be efforts from foreign governments to get more information, but it's still a question of how far China is willing to give," said Robert Lewis, a partner at Zhong Lun law firm in Beijing.

"Twenty years ago it was all about foreign capital coming into China and that foreign capital having the leverage in negotiations. Now it's the other way round, so China will not have to give as much on the transparency side as some might suspect".

The international community has demanded greater transparency from China on a number of fronts for years, wary of its intentions as the country grew to become the second-biggest economy in the world and symbolic of a shift in global power to emerging nations.

On the latest front, U.S. securities regulators are in an intense stand-off with their Chinese counterparts over access to Chinese audit documents. Separately, a U.S. congressional advisory panel described Chinese investment in the United States as a "potential Trojan horse."

China's state-secrets laws, massive bureaucracy and cronyism make it difficult to get key, verifiable information from Chinese companies.

But the same Chinese companies yield considerable global clout. Chinese companies launched $51.3 billion of overseas acquisitions this year, second only to Japan, making the country one of the world's most active buyers of corporate stakes and businesses abroad.

Much of that acquisition power is led by China's government-run companies, and its energy sector, which has both the cash and the need to build up oil-and-gas supplies to fuel the $5.8 trillion economy.

The government owns all large financial institutions, which lends according to state priorities and directives and which favour large state enterprises -- one reason why the Washington think tank, the Heritage Foundation, ranks China 138th out of 179 in global economic freedom.

Even Chinese companies that aren't classed as state-owned enterprises, such as telecom giants Huawei and ZTE, face accusations they could covertly gather information for Beijing.

In October, a U.S. congressional report urged American companies to stop doing business with the two companies saying the Chinese government could take advantage of their equipment for espionage purposes. Canada and Australia have also indicated they will ban Huawei from taking part in communication network projects due to cyber security concerns.

The Nexen deal, and a separate though less contentious $5.3 billion offer by Malaysia's Petronas for Canada's Progress Energy, provided capital infusions to two Canadian companies, not to mention payouts to shareholders at a time of economic uncertainty.

Such considerations may trump the fear of a state-owned bogeyman coming to town.

"No government in the world is going to say 'we don't want your money'," said Andrew Lumsden, a partner at Corrs Chambers Westgarth in Sydney. "There will be a bit of huffing and puffing but it's probably business as usual".

Last week, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) charged the Chinese affiliates of five of the world's biggest audit firms with violating U.S. securities law.

The United States and China could still reach a settlement, but the action shows the U.S. securities watchdog and their Chinese counterparts could not find agreement on the exact topic under discussion with CNOOC-Nexen: transparency of information.

Canada though is following in the steps of other countries that have attracted money from state-backed Chinese companies, such as Australia and Norway, in putting place a working set of ground rules.

"There's become an almost standard set of behavioral undertakings that firms accept in Australia from these kind of companies and reading between the lines it looks like the Canadians are doing similar," said Lumsden at Corrs Chambers Westgarth.

"The companies put in place a series of undertakings such as ensuring they have local management and comply with local environmental laws", he said.

Rupert Li, a partner at King & Wood Mallesons in Hong Kong, said all Chinese companies should study Nexen's transparency clause, particularly those that plan to venture abroad.

"If you want to be part of the global business community, people should have more visibility into your management, your finance, and who actually drives your strategy," Li said, adding the extent of a board's independence was also important.

"The question is whether the Chinese companies can actually dispel the notion that they are just part of the mandate from the Chinese government as opposed to being a true profit seeking entity," he added.

Ends
SA/EN
Continue Reading | comments

Review: Is Apple's 13iInch retina MacBook pro worth the money?

New York, Dec 19 : In June, Apple released its first Retina display-capable laptop, the phenomenal 15-inch MacBook Pro with Retina Display. Last month, the company unveiled the next member of the high-resolution family, the 13-inch MacBook Pro with Retina.

Apple boasts that the 13-inch MacBook Pro with Retina has the second-highest resolution screen on the market, a jaw-dropping 2,560 x 1,600 pixels (compared with 2,880 x 1,800 for the 15-inch beauty). Like the 15-inch MacBook Pro with Retina, the 13-inch model loses the optical drive –- a decision that both saves weight and allows for a larger battery.

Similarly, the machine is also decidedly upgrade-unfriendly. The RAM chips are soldered into the computer and are fixed at 8GB. And while the 13-inch MacBook Pro with Retina comes with a solid-state drive (SSD), its capacity cannot be changed after purchase.

With the 15-inch MacBook Pro with Retina, those limitations were worthwhile trade-offs, as the machine's performance, screen and overall usability simply tower over anything else on the market. With the 13-inch MacBook Pro with Retina, the situation is more complicated.

First, there’s the price. For the base model, the 13-inch MacBook Pro with Retina is $1,699. That gets you a 2.5GHz dual-core Intel Core i5 chip, 8GB of RAM and a 128GB SSD. For $1,999, users can upgrade to a 256GB hard drive. Other configurations with more storage space or a faster processor are also available.

Make no mistake –- $1,700 for a 13-inch laptop is expensive. Very expensive. Comparatively, the 15-inch MacBook Pro with Retina is a bargain. It starts at $2,199 but includes a quad-core Intel Core i7 chip, discrete graphics and has a base 256GB SSD. The fact that there's only a $200 difference between a 256GB SSD-equipped 13-inch and the base model with a 15-inch display is problematic because for that $200, you simply get much, much more computer.

The price gets more reasonable when you account for what an upgrade to an SSD drive does to the price of non-Retina MacBook Pro 13-inch computers, but it’s worth noting that those models are also user-serviceable, meaning that an aftermarket SSD, such as Samsung’s excellent 840 Pro Series, can be added later for less money.

The 13-inch MacBook Pro is Apple’s best-selling computer, and has been for a number of years. Until the price is lowered, I have a feeling the 13-inch MacBook Pro with Retina won’t be taking its crown.
The Screen

The reason that Apple can demand $1,700 for its 13-inch Macbook Pro with Retina is simple: The screen. It’s simply stunning.

Apple has scaled the resolution so the 2,560 x 1,600 screen displays objects at the same size as 1,280 x 800 (the standard 13-inch MacBook Pro resolution), only now with much more clarity.

If you’ve used a third- or fourth-generation iPad or played with the 15-inch MacBook Pro with Retina, you know how good a Retina screen can look. Text is pixel-free. Images pop. Icon details are more enhanced. It’s almost unworldly.

Of course, this does come with some trade-offs. Not all apps are Retina-ready, meaning they appear pixelated and fuzzy. Fortunately, these apps are fewer and far between, as Mac app developers have embraced Retina with aplomb in the last six months. Even apps that aren't Retina-enabled, such as Adobe Photoshop CS6, usually work fine. In the case of Photoshop, the chrome around the application and the menu buttons aren't optimized. However, documents (i.e. photos) can fully take advantage of the Retina resolution.

Microsoft has updated its Office for Mac 2011 suite to support Retina displays, and major web browsers -- including Google Chrome -- have followed suit.

Speaking of the web, this is where the jarring nature of pre- and post-Retina worlds is more clear. Websites that haven’t optimized for Retina look pretty bad. For images, this is often OK, but for icons and images such as logos and other text components, the jagged renderings can be an eyesore.

Fortunately, the state of the web is such that a number of larger sites (including Mashable) have started to shift to Retina optimization. It just makes sense. After all, devices such as Google’s Nexus 10 sport high resolutions and display densities, and virtually every high-end smartphone on the market has what one might consider a Retina-class screen. The Retina transition won’t happen overnight, but it’s already improved more than I could have imagined just six months ago.
Small Complaints

My only real complaint with the display on the 13-inch MacBook Pro with Retina is that it is, by default, scaled for 1,280 x 800. This resolution is fine for users coming from a 13-inch MacBook Pro, since every app and program is scaled the same, just with a much higher pixel density.

The problem creeps in for 13-inch MacBook Air owners. The resolution of the 13-inch MacBook Air is 1,440 x 900. That increase in pixel area is actually more significant than one might think. It ends up being about 250,000 pixels, which on a 13-inch display, can mean a notable increase in real estate.

Users can adjust the display scaling within OS X and make it appear to be 1,440 x 900, but in my tests, performance wasn't as smooth. Still, if you're a MacBook Air user, I’d recommend using that setting because those extra pixels are often necessary when multitasking or using lots of apps.
How Does the 13-Inch Retina MacBook Pro Perform

So the display is phenomenal. How about the rest of the computer?

For size (and presumably, cost) reasons, the 13-inch MacBook Pro with Retina uses a dual-core Intel Core i5 processor, a step down from the faster Core i7 you get in the 15-inch Retina Pro. This is the latest Ivy Bridge stuff which means USB 3.0 support.

The machine has two USB 3.0 ports, two Thunderbolt ports, an HDMI port and an SDXC card slot. It’s great to see Apple finally including HDMI ports on its laptops.

Apple says the 13-inch MacBook Pro with Retina can power two external displays, and in my tests, this proved to be true. The one caveat is that because the system is fixed with 8GB of RAM and it has an integrated Intel HD Graphics 4000 chipset, the video power for high-end work isn’t up to snuff, especially when comparing against the much more powerful 15-inch MacBook Pro with Retina.

I have a 2012 13-inch MacBook Air (base model), and I was curious to see the performance difference. While certain tasks, such as rendering video in iMovie and handling large Photoshop files, were noticeably better on the 13-inch Retina MacBook Pro, I can’t say I noticed a substantial speed or performance improvement.

This might be a testament to just how good of a computer the MacBook Air already is, but for something that costs $500 more, I wish I had seen a more tangible benefit.

I understand why Apple has to use the integrated graphics chips for the 13-inch MacBook Pro devices, but the impact this has on overall performance is visible, especially when dealing with such a high-resolution display.

Battery life, while decent, isn’t as good as what one will find on a MacBook Air. Still, I’d compare it favorably with the rest of Apple’s 13-inch MacBook Pro line, where you can expect about 5 hours of regular use per battery charge.

I do wish Apple had at least made 16GB of RAM an option. Eight gigs is fine for 2012 but in a few years, especially with the resolution of the display, I can see it not being enough. If someone is making the investment required by the 13-inch Macbook Pro with Retina, it’s hard to feel good about how well the machine will perform two years from now.
Apple’s portable computer lineup is in a state of transition. The low and high ends of its lines are very strong –- they're the best in class in everything from build quality to price/performance ratio.

I firmly believe the 13-inch MacBook Air is the best computer in its class and the best Ultrabook on the market (if that term can technically be applied to Macs). For 90% of Mac users who don’t have very specific needs, this is the portable I heartily recommend.

On the high end, it’s the same story. The 15-inch MacBook Pro with Retina Display, especially if configured with 16GB of RAM (since it can’t be upgraded later) is one hell of a machine. It boasts specs that rival and exceed those of my high-end 27-inch iMac, it has the best screen in the business, and it can be used for serious photo and video editing.

Where things break apart are the middle parts of Apple’s portable lineup. Apple still sells non-Retina MacBook Pros in 13- and 15-inch sizes. That in and of itself would be fine, except that these models all still ship with slower platter-based hard drives. Most users don’t realize it, but the reason that machines such as the MacBook Air and Samsung Series 9 seem so much faster than even last year’s best device isn’t because of the processor, but because of the SSD drive. It makes a tremendous difference.

The issue is that once you throw in an SSD at time of purchase to Apple’s non-Retina MacBook Pro machines, the cost gets incredibly close to the price of just upgrading to Retina. I can’t see recommending a non-SSD 13-inch MacBook Pro to someone over a 13-inch MacBook Air –- the performance differential is just too slight. Likewise, I would recommend that anyone serious about a 15-inch MacBook Pro just save up to go for the Retina model. It’s a better investment.

This puts the 13-inch MacBook Pro with Retina in a precarious position. In a few years (or even in six months) the component prices and specs might be good enough to justify its price. Eventually, the classic 13-inch MacBook Pro line will disappear (with the 13-inch MacBook Air taking its place for those users) and the Retina model will be for more serious power users.

While this transition is clearly happening, it hasn’t happened yet. As a result, the 13-inch MacBook Pro with Retina, while a fine machine, feels a little out of place.
Who Is This For?

Judging from my Twitter stream and conversations with prospective buyers, I would say the majority of would-be 13-inch MacBook Pro with Retina owners already own a 13-inch MacBook Air.

These are the users who are looking to see if the great display is worth upgrading to a pricier machine and slightly heavier frame.

Unless those users depend on a Retina display for graphics or web work, my recommendation is that at least right now, this isn’t the machine to buy. Overall, I think the price/performance ratio of the 13-inch MacBook Air is just better.

Having said that, with a few revisions and hardware upgrades, I could see the 13-inch MacBook Pro with Retina being the high-end MacBook Air. Think of it as a MacBook Air Pro.

For users looking at getting a 13-inch Macbook Pro and not a MacBook Air, the 13-inch MacBook Pro with Retina Display is a better value (once the price of the SSD is added into the equation).
Is It Worth It?

I’m ultimately conflicted about the 13-inch MacBook Pro with Retina Display. On the one hand, it’s a nice machine with a fantastic screen. After using the Retina display for a few weeks, moving back to my 13-inch MacBook Air was difficult. The screen is exquisite. It’s almost worth the price of admission. Almost.

What's inescapable is that this first version of the 13-inch Retina MacBook Pro isn’t a winner when it comes to price and performance. It’s just a bit too expensive.

If you buy the MacBook Pro with Retina Display, you won’t be disappointed. It’s a great machine. Still, I have to think it’s the next revision that will better fit into the budgets and requirements for most buyers.

The upside is that the 13-inch MacBook Pro with Retina Display gives us a glimpse at the future of Apple’s portable lineup -- and that bodes well for Mac fans everywhere.

Ends
SA/EN
Continue Reading | comments

In giant "garage sale", Japan's TV giants hawk $3 billion of assets

Tokyo, Dec 19 : Panasonic Corp, Japan's struggling maker of Viera brand TVs, owns more than 10 million square meters of office and factory space, dormitories for its workers and sports facilities for its rugby, baseball and women's athletics teams.

As it battles for Christmas shoppers' wallets in the year-end holiday season, the sprawling electronics conglomerate is also seeking buyers for some of those properties to trim its fixed costs and improve cashflow at a time of intense competition, particularly from South Korean rivals such as Samsung Electronics Co.

Japan's other troubled TV makers, Sony Corp and Sharp Corp, are also selling buildings and businesses in a giant 'garage sale' that could raise a combined $3 billion.

Panasonic plans to raise $1.34 billion from offloading property and shares in other Japanese companies by end-March, the group's chief financial officer Hideaki Kawai said.

"We have a lot of land and buildings in Japan and overseas," he said in an interview at the company's head office in Osaka, in western Japan. He declined to list which properties would go on the block, but said most are in Japan.

Included is a 24-storey central Tokyo block - built in 2003 with more than 47,300 square meters and housing 2,000 Panasonic workers - a source familiar with the plan said.

Kawai added that Panasonic would raise about a quarter of the sell-off funds by getting rid of shares it owns in other companies - a common practice of cross-shareholdings in Japan.

The proceeds would help bolster free cashflow to 200 billion yen ($2.43 billion) for the business year to March, Kawai said, and allow Panasonic to reduce its debt and maintain its crucial research and development effort as it revamps its business portfolio.

It will sell more assets in the year starting in April if cashflow dips below 200 billion yen, Kawai added. Panasonic President Kazuhiro Tsuga has promised to shut or sell businesses operating at below a 5 percent margin. Those sales could start as soon as April.

Panasonic's fixed assets of $21 billion are around 30 percent more than those of Apple Inc, and are almost double the company's market value. The company, founded almost a century ago as a small electrical extension socket maker, trades at around half its book value - which includes intangible assets such as patents. Sony trades at 39 percent of book, Sharp at 30 percent.

The fixed assets - buildings, land and machinery - of the three companies that were not so long ago a byword for innovation in household gadgetry total around $42 billion, while their combined market value is $24 billion.

The three firms have been downgraded by credit ratings agencies, making it tougher to raise funding on capital markets, and making asset sales more urgent.

Selling assets "is good in terms of their credit ratings because, for all three, it will lower fixed costs and they can reduce their capex requirements. Eventually, this could improve operating margins and, more importantly, cashflow," said Alvin Lim, an analyst at Fitch Ratings in Seoul.

Fitch, which makes its ratings without input from company management, last month cut Panasonic to BB and Sony to BB minus, the first time one of the major agencies has relegated either company to junk status. Sharp is ranked B minus, adding to its borrowing costs.

"We rate Panasonic as investment grade, and it should have various funding options. Selling assets it can do without, to avoid raising additional borrowing, can be an option," said Osamu Kobayashi, an analyst at Standard & Poor's.

While Korean rivals have also benefited from a weaker local currency, data from the Japan Electronics and Information Technology Industries Association shows that Japanese production of consumer electronic equipment fell to just above $15 billion last year from more than $19 billion a decade ago. Output in September was just $980 million, half last year's level.

"The gap with Korean makers seems to be widening. It's going to be very difficult for them to regain their top-tier position," said Fitch's Lim.

As the three Japanese firms, all under new leadership, have sketched out restructuring plans, the cost of insuring their debt against defaulting in 5 years has dropped from spikes just a month ago. Credit default swaps for Sharp and Sony are down to levels last seen 3 months ago, while Panasonic's have dropped 40 percent in the past month.

While Panasonic is looking to revamp its business around batteries, auto parts and household appliances, Sony is doubling down on smartphones, gaming and cameras. Sharp, meanwhile, is focusing on display screens and is forging alliances with the likes of Taiwan's Hon Hai Precision Industry and U.S. chipmaker Qualcomm Inc.

Sony may also take the real estate sale route to raise much-needed cash, with a possible sale of its 37-storey New York headquarters, dubbed by New Yorkers as the 'Chippendale' because of its design that is reminiscent of the period English furniture. Selling that jewel could raise $1 billion, media have reported.

The maker of Vaio laptops, PlayStation gaming consoles and Bravia TVs may also sell its battery business, which makes lithium ion power packs for tablets, PCs and mobile phones. The company has been approached by investment banks offering to sell the unit, which employs 2,700 people and has three factories in Japan and two overseas assembly plants. Sony values the business's fixed assets at $636 million.

Potential buyers could include BYD Co Ltd, a Chinese carmaker backed by billionaire investor Warren Buffett, and Taiwan's Hon Hai - which part owns Sharp's advanced LCD panel plant in Sakai, western Japan, and is in talks to buy TV assembly plants in China, Malaysia and Mexico for $667 million, Japan's Sankei newspaper has reported.

Sharp has mortgaged nearly all its properties to secure a $4.6 billion bailout from Japanese banks and so has few assets to offer in a grand garage sale.

Instead, it's selling part of the garage.

Qualcomm has agreed to buy a 5 percent stake in Sharp, making it the largest shareholder. Hon Hai, which earlier this year agreed to invest in Sharp - before its stock slumped in the wake of record losses - has said it remains interested in taking a stake.

"Whatever they can get to get through this fiscal period by scaling down their operation is a critical step for them to remain afloat," said Fitch's Lim.


Ends
SA/EN
Continue Reading | comments

Authorities endanger commuters

Baramulla, Dec 19 : Authorities have put the inhabitants here at risk by failing to construct a parapet wall along a culvert near sumo stand in Baramulla town here.

In absence of the parapet wall many people have sustained injuries in past few months after they slipped into a stream flowing under the culvert.

Authorities entrusted with maintenance of the Srinagar- Baramulla highway have failed to construct the parapet wall on both sides of the culvert making it dangerous for commuters.

"I suffered multiple fractures after my bike skidded from the culvert into the stream,” said Ashiq Hussain of Baramulla.

“It is ironical that despite several mishaps the concerned authority is still in a slumber. Authorities have endangered our lives by resorting to dilly-dallying tactics to construct the parapet wall along the culvert,” the locals said.

Ends
SA/EN
Continue Reading | comments
 
Copyright © 2011. Newswire . All Rights Reserved
Company Info | Contact Us | Privacy policy | Term of use | Widget | Advertise with Us | Site map
Template Modify by Creating Website. Inpire by Darkmatter Rockettheme Proudly powered by Blogger